The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks...[W: 349]

This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Originally Posted by Henrin

Lol! Did you ever wager I'm challenging them on their bull****? English matters and when someone makes an absolute statement it is ABSOLUTE! There is no way around that. If I write a contract barring a certain activity it is BARRED. There is no doubt about it or way around it. It is BARRED absolutely. Learn logic.

Okie Dokie....try winning that argument in a court. You would be laughed out of the courtroom.

Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Originally Posted by wbcoleman

Let's face facts. This was all kabuki. What I don't understand is why the Dems forced the Senate to kill it rather than the House.

I imagine the original idea was to get gun control through the Senate and then when it failed in the house to blame everything on the republicans. In the end however, they realized they didn't have the votes in the Senate either, so they were left with no choice, but to simply look like they tried. The voting public as we all know is a bunch of puppets, so it was worth it for all involved to have the vote.

Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Originally Posted by Henrin

I'm not in the court room. What am I doing is supposedly talking to a man of reason, and someone that speaks the english language.

Sorry....but you ARE supposedly discussing whether a restriction would pass Constitutional muster. I'm sorry if you failed to realize that. Carry on with your base level discussion. If you wanna play with the big boys, pick up a textbook and come back.

Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Originally Posted by disneydude

Sorry....but you ARE supposedly discussing whether a restriction would pass Constitutional muster. I'm sorry if you failed to realize that. Carry on with your base level discussion. If you wanna play with the big boys, pick up a textbook and come back.

These big boys you talk of are dishonest assholes that ignore basic logic to grow the power of the state. I expect that thinking men and women would know better than to simply be a puppet to such nonsense. The rules of english dictate that absolute language is absolute. Anyone that says otherwise is either being dishonest or they are stupid.

Re: The Senate has defeated a compromise proposal to expand background checks on fire

Originally Posted by AlabamaPaul

Explain to me, if you can, how this amendment would have changed anything about what happened at Sandy Hook? The perp murdered his mother and used her weapons to commit the crime...

I believe many people in the US saw this bill as a step in the right direction and a compromise, from what I read no one was saying it was going to stop mass shootings but it would of got the ball moving in some peoples eyes. The fact that this bill was shot down just confirms to me that the right are unwilling to even to meet the left anywhere near the middle and nothing will ever change in the US. Its sad for people like my wife's family who's opinion and views get ignored under the weight of the NRA and their millions of dollars.

‘This is not peace, it is an armistice for 20 years.’ (Ferdinand Foch. After the Treaty of Versailles, 1919).